User talk:Bcorr

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please click here to add a new message at the bottom of this page (I always check starting at the bottom and then work my way up...)

rusting schoolbus in an Oklahoma field

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Hey Bcorr :) I hope you like the place and choose to stay.

Some links that may be of use:
• Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers
• Wikipedia:How to edit a page
• Wikipedia:Village pump - ask questions you may have here, or leave a message on my talk page

Nice work on Sovereignty association! However, don't forget to bold the title in your introduction. You can use three 's, like '''bold'''.

Keep contributing! :) Dysprosia 04:44, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)

[edit] Archived talk

[edit] • Mediation on Gujarat Riots page

Could I propose you to look into the Gujarat Riots page.It is hardly neutral and at this point of time it reflects the opinions of BJP sympathisers who have two fold agenda: 1. Mix it with the Godhra train fire episode.BJP has been promoting the line that it was a natural repurcussion of the burning of train while the media and secularists tried to separate the two. (http://www.atimes.com/ind-pak/DE14Df01.html) 2. Showing that the events were beyond control of Narendra Modi the chief minister and improving his image when his actions and inactions were decried in national and international media and he was denied visa to the US on these grounds Ideally the presentation of the article should be:

  • 1. Summary
  • 2. Causes
  • 3. Effects
  • 4. Point of view of Hindu organisations and BJP
  • 5. Point of view of Indian National Human Rights Commission
  • 6. Point of view of International Human Rights Organisations and Governments
  • 6. Enquiries into the incidents and their reports
  • 7. Criticisms of the enquiry by BJP
  • 8. Arrests and Court cases
  • 9. Present Scenario

Thanks - there are some users who have presented their blatantly biased POVs on talk pages - they should be removed from editing

Hello there. I have been inactive for a while, but I am finally responding to your request. Please see my proposal at Talk:2002 Gujarat violence#Proposal for informal mediation from Bcorr. Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 20:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
I would like to ask you. Who made the edit above your comment? Not to be personal, but the person seems to have a clear POV.Bakaman Bakatalk 17:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Hello, Bakaman. If you look at the edit history, you'll see that it was 62.189.60.30. Also, I didn't make the above-referenced proposal to please that particular user, but because I thought I might be able to help. Editing is now underway at 2002 Gujarat violence/2006 revision -- I hope you will participate according to the guidelines on the article's talk page.
Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 18:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

One thing I might request you to do is kickstart the project ONLY when Netaji gets back. It is an article he cares about, and since I have Wikiproject:Bengal taking most of my time, he is usually the only person who moves the article from anti-Hindu stance to just facts. Right now, sorry to say, but the article looks like it was written by the Pakistani government. I have deleted some inflammatory lines. If you have any influence over terryJHo, please tell him not to make the page extremely POV, other than that I have to say you are a brave soul. Bakaman Bakatalk 04:01, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Bcorr, I am ever ready to listen to your advise.Please let me know if I am wrong at any stage.TerryJ-Ho 18:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I just feel taht the article is not really reflective of the true situation.Bakaman Bakatalk 22:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I guess using "cesspool" was too adventurous but calling women and children Hindu zealots is extremely POV. I made some changes to the article and decided not to comment on the talk page anymore because of hounding by certain users that hate me. I will try to balance the article with sourced and fact-based edits.Bakaman Bakatalk
I have been working to cite sources. Could you tell me what "NC" means? TerryJHo has suggested that the whole attack on the train and riots were a conspiracy. Actually, just look at the article talk page its easier to sort through. Bakaman Bakatalk 15:18, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi Bcorr : The whole article is a mess and better be called as Hindutva perspective of Gujarat Riots.TerryJ-Ho 11:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I would like you to note this edit justifying the death of civilians in mass killings which the British daily Guardian referred to as "rightly described as Genocide" [1]. I suspect if edits from these editors could ever be neutral and encyclopoedic. Are there no guidelines/ actions on WP against such hatemongering. 62.189.60.30 17:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • RE: Johnny Lee Clary - Please help

Hey there, my name is Nick, my username is Potters house and I have encountered a problem with trying to provide any information about Johnny Lee Clary. I have posted this post off to other staff members also. I am not sure if this is the best route to resolve this, but can think of no other way.

The article Johnny Lee Clary has been deleted. I have known Johnny through telephone conversations and email for a short time now (about 3-4 months). He recently came and shared his life story in for our church group for the first time just two weeks ago. Before I met Johnny I became interested in his story i.e. his conversion from the head of the KKK in the US, to being a Christian Minister who now teaches against race hate groups. I found the article Johnny Lee Clary as it still is today, deleted, except for some small talk. If you read the talk you see what I have said at the time (notice I have gotten no reply, probable my fault as I don’t know heaps about WIKI policy). From my understanding Johnny Lee Clary was posting as The KingOfDixie and looks like he tried to change a few things on Wiki concerning the KKK. While this is a controversial subject, Johnny being the former leader of the KKK would probably know a thing or two and be able to contibute, but that’s another story. He eventually made an article about himself i.e. Johnny Lee Clary. Johnny being quite new to Wiki and ignorant of rules of conduct found himself at odds with some admins and had his site deleted.

Whilst observing Johnny over the last 3-4 months I have noticed that he is very outspoken against race hate groups such as the Neo Nazis, Skinheads, KKK etc. This, more often than not, lands Johnny in the hot seat. He has experienced persecution from racist groups for his departure from the KKK and voiced opinions against these racist organizations on his webpage, www.xkkk.org. Johnny has also received multiple death threats.

Because of his bold stance against these racist groups Johnny has become accustomed to hatred directed at him by those same groups. Johnny concluded that perhaps the guy who deleted the page Johnny Lee Clary was a white supremist. I am hoping to clear this up. Before he told me this, I started to create J L Clary, after hearing nothing from posting in user talk on Johnny Lee Clary's article. I wasn't 10 minutes into the J L Clary article when it was issued a deletion notice, and then before I had time to reply (about 5 minutes) it was deleted! I was amazed. I told this to Johnny and he said the main reason he was told that he couldn't have an article was because he was not prominent enough.

Johnny has a very famous testimony and has been on multiple TV shows like Oprah, Donahue, Jerry Springer, etc, and even recently when he preached in our town he made front page news, a double spread on his life, and the local ABC interviewed him live, which is not bad for our town (LISMORE NSW Australia) See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Kerry&dir=prev&offset=20050327125109&limit=500&action=history .

When David Wilkerson came to our town hardly anyone knew or cared, yet David Wilkerson is allowed an article (and rightfully so), but more people know of Johnny. As to whether he is famous or not, just Google search him and see all the TV interviews and radio interviews he does. He hangs with some of the most prominent Christian leaders in Australia. Besides this, just being the former KKK leader should be enough for an article (he doesn't even get a mention in the KKK one, and would be deleted). He was also a Pro Wrestler. So he is prominent in Christian circles, he is prominent amongst race hate groups, and he is also prominent in the WWE wrestling.

Johnny asked me to test the waters for him to see if he was being persecuted by someone from a race hate group. So I created some sites, John Clary Wade Watts and Operation Colorblind - the name of Johnny's Ministry. These have been fine until yesterday. I cannot understand why these sites are just issued a deletion notice? Just because they mention JLC? I was hoping to discuss these things but they are just deleted. The one on Wade Watts is about a black gospel preacher who was one of the leaders in the civil rights movement in the US and was good friends with Martin Luther King. He took Johnny Clary under his wing and even ordained Johnny as a minister (to this day Johnny is the only white man ordained in the All Black Baptist Church). But his article is up for deletion because I mentioned Clary and had a link.

That is why I am writing to you to see if you can help. It seems to me that the person(s) deleting all articles which even mention Johnny Lee Clary has an agenda. I thought that wikipedia admins had to keep a neutral stance on every article. It seems like this guy has a vendetta against JLC. Why delete the Wade Watts article. That is guilt by association and could be proof that all deletions are because of racial discrimination! I hope this is not the case and would think that it is politically motivated, as Johnny is a strong supporter of George Bush and Antaeus Feldspar of Kerry.

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Kerry&dir=prev&offset=20050327125109&limit=500&action=history This shows how Antaeus Feldspar supports Kerry, which is fine, but Johnny is a strong supporter of Bush.

My hope is that Johnny will be able to have an article like any other famous person, minister, former KKK leader, or pro wrestler, and that Johnny and anyone connected with him and his ministry will in future have certain rules set in place that do not allow the wholesale deletion of the articles associated with him, but that they will be at least discussed.

I thank you for reading this long winded post. I have only been using WIKI for about a year myself so I need your help, I don't really know what else to do. I hope you can help. I personally think that Johnny's story is one that is beneficial to the cause of reconciliation between races and to the3 unity of society as a whole. It would be a shame if WIKI became known for having covert racists. Of course I hope that this is a misunderstanding and that all will be cleared up soon.

Here are some links that might help.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wade_Watts

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TheKingOfDixie

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Colorblind

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Threeafterthree

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Potters_house

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_policy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Antaeus_Feldspar

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Kerry&dir=prev&offset=20050327125109&limit=500&action=history This shows how Antaeus Feldspar supports Kerry, which is fine, but Johnny is a strong supporter of Bush. Perhaps the bias is political and not racial?

The link for page: John Clary has already been deleted!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alabamaboy

Please notice that his link was taken from the KKK site the same day:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ku_Klux_Klan&diff=prev&oldid=65690238

then

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ku_Klux_Klan&diff=next&oldid=65690238

Also note his contributions: Featured articles: · African American literature -- My first featured article. Thanks to everyone who gave feedback. While I didn't start the article, I obsessed on it for an entire month and wrote most of the copy. · Ku Klux Klan -- I began work on this article after it became a featured article. Since then I've mediated several editorial disputes on the article (including one of which kept the article from being delisted as a FA) and made a large number of edits. Potters house 00:11, 27 July 2006 (UTC) Nick.

I apologize about the delay in responding, Potters house. However, from reading Talk:Johnny Lee Clary it appears that the issue is now moot. Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 20:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • Wikimania

Sorry, Bcorr. I was planning to go and give a talk as requested by Essjay on the UPF Encyclopedia Project, but my boss there didn't approve this.

I'm sorry I won't be seeing the gang there. It would have been a blast! --Uncle Ed 15:23, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • George Washington...

This topic has been heavily discussed on the talk page and a consensus has been reached. Then you just came and added deist without any evidence or saying anything on the talk page. Can you please show me where Washington says he is a deist? Unless you can provide it you are adding an opinion. Historians do not say he was a deist they simply do not know.

71.131.208.47 20:26, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps I am mistaken, but looking at the talk page I can see no such consensus. Also, if you compare the current version with one from July 30 I believe that I have simply been one of many people to restore what has long been the general consensus about Washington's beliefs.
Also, I didn't "just come and add deist without any evidence or saying anything on the talk page" -- I simply restored information that someone who was not logged in removed in the last few edits -- again, as have many other editors.
Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 20:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Sry but an anon editor added deist to the infobox with absolutely no source whatsoever while Washington's religion wasnt listed for at least over 3 months for a reason. He added it from august seventh (Today):

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=George_Washington&diff=68122804&oldid=68109644

If there is a source where Washington says he was a deist I will not touch it but until then it needs a source. Anon editors cant just come in and change big info without sources.

Both sides agree that the subject is a matter of debate as well as historians do not know. I dont understand why you keep reverting.

22:24, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

FYI, this anon editor is banned user:Jerry Jones/user:JJstroker. His ban was due mostly to pushing, plagiarism, and edit warring. -Will Beback 06:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Will -- that explains a lot....I appreciate your note. BCorr|Брайен 11:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • Thanks

Hi, thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. Nelson50 20:23, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome -- I'm happy to help! BCorr|Брайен 12:37, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • Edits to Truck

You asked me for advice on what I think regarding the reverts to the Truck article. The anonymous IP 65.87.105.7 added the word 'human' to create the sentence "A truck is a motor vehicle for human transporting goods." Regardless of the fact that this sentence does not flow as well, it makes it unclear if the truck transports goods for humans, or is for humans to transport goods. You reverted this change back to the original sentence, a change which I support. The anon IP came back two minutes later and made the same edit again [2] - which I promptly reverted back to your edit. The note you left on my talk page says "I do take an accusation of violating policy rather seriously", but I have in fact reverted the anonymous IP 65.87.105.7. The edit summary (automatically inserted and not of my creation) was directed at him, not you. I am sorry for any confusion this revert may have caused. --Llort 12:35, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, Llort. I now see what you mean. I've been inactive for a while, so I'm trying to be sensitive, but I was oversensitive in this case. Also, I haven't been around for the development of many of the automated editing tools, so I didn't really grasp the "good faith" part, but it is now clear. I'm sorry to have bothered you about it. Thanks again, BCorr|Брайен 12:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Crossposted to User talk:Llort

[edit] • Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Rmrfstar (second nomination)

I don't understand completely since my edit wasn't about the rfa itself, but I won't revert. Thanks for your courteous note. Attic Owl 15:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi again -- yes, your edit wasn't part of the RfA dicsussion, but that's actually the point. When there's a note asking that an archived page not be modified, it applies to the entire page -- otherwise the integrity of the page can be called into question, and there's also the slippery slope regarding what edits are acceptable: small notes? typos? misstatements? clarifications? changes of mind? And thank you for your courteous note.
Thanks again, BCorr|Брайен 15:43, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • Wikimania

Brian, it was great meeting you too. Have seen your name since the beginning of the Wikipedia epoch, so am glad to have a real-life meeting. Hope you don't mind if I contact you about your views on the early history. Cheers! -- Fuzheado | Talk 11:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't mind at all -- in fact I'd love to. Just email me whenever you'd like to "talk". Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 12:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • Atlantic Monthly

Thanks, Trödel pointed that out to me, and someone else slapped a {{high-traffic}} template on my page. All very odd. I'll be sure to keep an eye out for the Marshall Poe Rowdies... Alai 17:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

And just remember, Big Brother is Watching You... :-) BCorr|Брайен 20:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] * Regarding 2002 Gujarat violence

Thanks for your input. I did not mean to sound "final" as you put it. I merely said that I think all sources need qualification so that bias is not there. Since many sources ARE biased (liberal socialists, secular fundamentalists and radical Islamists vs hindu sources) we must be careful of this terrotory.Thanks and have a nice day.Netaji 23:50, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

  • I would rather ask this user to mention all the sources that he considers as neutral and then we can have a detailed analysis of who is wrong and who is right.A secular fundamentalist would probably be more neutral than a Hindu or Muslim fundamentalist.Do you agree BCorr TerryJ-Ho

[edit] • Civility

Yep, this is certainly civil. "move La Vérité to Truth#Classical philosophers section as per talk. Note: This is not removing the picture, as that would be in violation of User:Jim62sch's edicts". Primary point is that I despise censorship, and everytyime I see someone try to remove that picture I am reminded of Ashcroft having several statues covered because the showed, gasp, a breast. I assume you were also refering to my edit on the AfD for Truth Theory, yet there was certainly nothing uncivil in that edit -- Google is over-relied on. Additionally, I was hardly just responding to you, but rather making a point re Google and it's use to defend articles on Wiki. Sorry if you took it as incivility, but that was not the point. •Jim62sch• 12:37, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

BTW: I know that you're a good editor, you needn't defend yourself regarding that (at least not to me). I just get miffed about certain things and sometimes type in a fit of pique (or high dudgeon).
Also, the pic on your talk page is rather interesting -- a rotting hulk you found somewhere? •Jim62sch• 12:44, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, one other thing, this "(remove misleading faux infobox opinion about La Verite which has been placed into a box as if it were some official Wikipedia policy infobox)" was Jon Awbrey's, which everyone more or less agreed upon. •Jim62sch• 13:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your thoughtful and informative reply, Jim -- I appreciate it. I also apologize for my edit summary -- I was a bit testy, and I didn't need to mention you in it or refer to an edict.
I made an (erroneous) assumption that because the wording in your reply was similar to the infobox that you had created that as well. I am also sorry about that. I understand your position on these issues and detest Ashcroft (and Gonzalez) as well.
In terms of the picture, I had never though of any implications there might be from its presence on this page -- I just like the colors and the subject, and I really enjoyed my drive on the day I shot it (driving from Houston to Anderson, South Carolina in one day, via the SE corner of Oklahoma -- my only time in that state).
Thanks again,
BCorr|Брайен 02:43, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • User:68.9.192.235

What are you reffering to? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.9.192.235 (talk • contribs).

I am referring to this edit to André 3000, this edit to The Squid and the Whale, and this edit to Racism
Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 19:51, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
What I removed from the squid and the whale article was unfounded speculation with no textual verification that made the article unencyclopedeiac,as was that on the Andre 3000 article (speculated details about a celebrity's personal life taken from thier ability to ACT on a show are not wikipedia-worthy), and the description on Affirmative action as positive discrimination constitutes NPOV. Simple edits to articles, which anyone reading them with a certain degree of scrutiny might make, do not merit a talk page topic. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.9.192.235 (talk • contribs).
I'm afraid you still need to use the talk pages and edit summaries and not simply delete information without explanation or comment. This is especially true as you are editing without an account. Thanks again, BCorr|Брайен 20:00, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • edits to Ron Dellums

{{Template:Test2a-n|Ron Dellums}} Argyriou 15:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Please re-read my edit summaries and the talk page (over the last few months) for the article. Also, I find it strange that you would use the term "vandalism" for my reverting to an older version to restore information that was part of the article being listed as a candidate for a good article, while not immediately restoring the dozens on in-line links. In any case it's been cleaned up now. And you might think twice before long-time editors of vandalism. Please see Wikipedia:Civility for more. Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 17:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Your recent edit summaries were misleading - in both cases, your revert was removing information; you weren't reverting the removal of information. None of Justforasecond's edits yesterday or today removed any information from the article. The fact that the article was a candidate for a good article and that you have been editing the article in question make your actions in removing significant amounts of information that much more questionable. Argyriou 18:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Enlarge
Looking back at them I can see why you might say this, but here is the situation. I'm including screenshots of the diff of this edit(with the summary "restore deleted information from the article and remove POV additions. I don't have time to re-add the web references now, but I will do that later today") that I made on my screen, it looked as though my edit (on the right side of the page) was adding in significant chunks of text. I did it quickly, and didn't look carefully through it to see that the balance between the left and right columns was uneven, making it look clearly like I was adding a lot back in, and simply removing some links to external (from Wikipedia) web pages.
Enlarge
I will be more careful in the future, but I will continue to watch the article for balance and to help keep it from turning into an article that focuses primarily on the criticisms of Dellums as hypocritical and as a sell-out. BCorr|Брайен 22:53, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • Reverting at Wikipedia

Why did you use automated anti-vandalism tools here? The editing seemed to be a quite reasonable attempt to improve the article. Jkelly 22:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi there. It seemed like a questionable set of edits with a somewhat obnoxious edit summary, and was from an anon IP on a very prominent page. I did think about leaving or reworking it, but the removed information from the first edit, I felt, ought to stay in the article, and the second edit I thought was not well written and its point was a bit fuzzy, so I went for the revert button. Perhaps it was a bit "the easy way out", but it was a judgment call on my part. Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 22:42, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. Jkelly 02:23, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • Thanks!!

Thanks for removing my note on the Open Tasks page.. I have no idea how that one happened. Was trying to leave a note for an anonymous user... --Bobblehead 23:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem -- sometimes the database does weird things. There was a while when notes on talk pages for one anon IP would show up on a completely different page. The mystery of the wiki.... BCorr|Брайен 23:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • Complaint

Please don't use admin rollback to revert non-vandalism edits, as you did on Psephos. Also, don't revert without explanation. Margana 12:25, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

When an user is engaged in what is approaching a revert war (as you were in the article as is demonstrated in the article's history, using the revert tool (a.k.a. "admin rollback", and which automatically does not give a separate explanation other than reversion to the prior editor's version) is reasonable and justified. You made the same basic edit 16 times in less than a month despite a number of different editors removing your edits as Nor following NPOV. Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 17:18, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • hi BCorr

Hi BCorr. If you have noticed my comments have been very civil. But some guys seem to act like big daddies around here, having their own vested pre-concieved notions, stalking the users who do not adhere to their diktats, don't u think so? Violates the spirit of Wikipedia to some extent I would venture to say. --Geek1975 12:27, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Refrain from characterizing the objectivity of other users.Bakaman Bakatalk 00:00, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • Gujarat name-callin

User TerryJho has called me a fascist here [3] and here [4]. He also has insulted Netaji in the same breath.Bakaman Bakatalk 00:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I wonder if calling someone a fascist is violation of Wiki-etiquette, fascism is a doctrine, some subscribe to it and advocate it, some don't.... should'nt be an offence, or am I wrong here? --Geek1975 07:56, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

What a load of bull from Geek. He knows perfectly well TerryJHo meant "Nazi". He called the democratically elected president of India a fascist also in the same page. I request that you confront him and tell him and his tag team buddy Geek to stop name-calling. Also just because myself and Netaji do not subscribe to his POV, he has tried to get me indef banned. Bakaman Bakatalk 14:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure how to respond, other than to say that I will check out the page that has been referred to under the care of the Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal and check in on how things are going in the revision. Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 18:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • Tea page

Hi,

I understand that this looked like a commercial plug, however I would like to point that the recipes are not the products, these are free recipe developed kindly by professional cooks:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea#Tea_history.2C_culture_and_local_specifics

I would also like to point out that below down the page a very comparable link to iced tea page on a commercial website exists:

10 part series on the history of iced tea http://www.luzianne.com/more_icedtea_uncovered.cfm


So it appears to me that you are not consistent in your strategy, either this is authorized or not. If it is not then fair but remove the other commercial plugs. If it is permitted please reinstate my link.

Kind regards, marc. (unsigned comment by User:Mweiersmuller)

Hi there,
Is is against policy. I noticed your addition and it did merit removal. However, I didn't go through and check all the links in the article. That in no way means that other commercial links are OK. We're all just volunteers here, and we notice and fix what we can. I will go back and remove the link you mentioned, now that I'm aware of it. Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 19:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
P.S. I left you a welcome message on your talk page.

[edit] User:Subhash bose

The "wrong version" essay says that "there are no reports of a sysop ever having protected the 'right' version" but you protected the "right" version. BhaiSaab talk 22:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • Hospitality Club link in the peace article

Hi!

I am new to editing articles in Wikipedia, so please forgive me for my mistakes. I read the Wikipedia:Spam page that you recommended. When adding the Hospitality Club link to the article, my intention was not to promote a site. I only thought that as the Hospitality Club is a peace organization, it should be mentioned in the peace article. After all, the Hospitality club has peace building as an objective and this is related to peace in general. That's why I added the link.

But you seem to disagree?

Best regards,

"Wiki-Amateur" (unsigned comment by User:193.167.112.34)

Thanks for your reply. There have been a number of people in the past who are connected to hospitality services and have shared your feelings about puttings links into the peace article. The general consensus here is that despite the goal of building goodwill and peace, these links do not belong in that article. The other issue is that generally external links are to provide more information on a topic, but not as a way to drive traffic to the external site. While it is a judgment call in some cases, sites with numerous Google ads or other revenue-generaing links (such as the one you added) usually don't make the cut unless they are extremely relevant to the article -- such as the AFS hospitality link you added to the AFS article.
I hope this helps. Thanks again, BCorr|Брайен 12:03, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • RE: George Washington removal...

I removed the deist from the info box because there was no information or source on it. So its ok to have unverifiable information on wikipedia? What kind of encyclopedia is this?

No reply as this is a sockpuppet of banned user:Jerry Jones/user:JJstroker. BCorr|Брайен 13:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] • from Neil Steinberg

Dear Bcorr:

Having read the article on Wikipedia in the New Yorker, I was inspired to look at the history behind my entry, and noticed your quick and timely removal of the awkward slam inserted into my profile. I wanted to say I appreciate it, and was curious as to how you could identify and fix it so quickly.

Also, I have a question. The last item of my profile was added immediately upon a legal trouble I had last fall. I decided to leave it up, as recent news that was germane, but thought that, after a year, I would see about having it taken down, replaced with information about the book I am writing for Dutton on the subject. Would this be appropriate? I don't want to be accused of whitewashing my profile, on the other hand I don't think that means I have to leave insignificant negative slurs up -- the case was dismissed.

Neil Steinberg

Dear Neil,
Thanks for your note. I think I was probably just checking the recent changes to articles and noticed that someone who wasn't logged in made an edit wihout a summary, and when I looked at the article about you -- as you saw in the history -- the previous edit added in material that was neither neutral or terribly informative, so I removed the whole thing. A lot of the volunteer editors and administrators (like me), do our best to check for vandalism and biased editing when we have a bit of time. It's actually an important part of the culture of the "Wikipedia community."
In terms of the article about you, I would say that you should not edit it yourself unless you create an account and log in, and then first leave a note on the article's discussion page (talk page) explaining the proposed change. Even then, you might want to wait a couple of days, and then change only things that are completely incorrect. Alternately, you could leave a note on the talk page asking someone to make the change. But you are right to be careful and ask -- as you know, many people (including some of your colleagues in the media) assume that anyone editing their own entry is up to no good.
And finally, I will look at the article carefully and see if I (as an unbiased party) think I should edit it.
Thanks again, Brian (BCorr|Брайен 14:04, 21 August 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Please respond on my talk page

There is no correspondence between geek, terryjho and myself anymore. This is in response to his hate attack of me [5] and his vandalism of my user and talk pages. I am sorry to bring you this news but I feel it is necessary. The only Muslim user I will discuss with (at the moment) is Bhaisaab. I am really shaken by the past couple of days on wiki.(look at my talk page/talk page history)Bakaman Bakatalk 22:53, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations

Hi! Congratulations on being accurately quoted. It was great meeting you at Wikimania2006! Your Wikimania friend, CocoaZen 20:55, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I need help with a personal attack against me

User:SqueakBox doesn't like me. He has insulted me in the past and, recently, he was blocked for posting the following insult in his user page: "My greatest achievements here [...] have been [...] and restoring José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero from the POV of another user who claims to write about saints." (See the entry for August 21 in his block log) My nick, Hagiographer means just that, "to write about saints", so it's clear that comment is a direct attack against me. Furthermore, when I came to the article about Zapatero SqueakBox had already been banned from editing Zapatero's editing articles by the Arbitraton Committee (what can he restore?). And, in fact, I've never contributed or deleted information from any of those articles. I simply reverted some vandalism SqueakBox introduced as part of his harassment campaing against other user who was also banned by the same Arbitration Comittee decision. So, that paragraph is pure slander.

Taking WP:NPA into account, I believe that paragraph should be deleted or, at least, marked like what it is, a personal attack. I did just that [6]. However, SqueakBox removed it and User:Guettarda protected the page here. SqueakBox has had a lot of problems with other users and, sometimes, Guettarda has taken part in them. For example, in User:SqueakBox can be found a barnstar given by User:Guettarda in which he says that SqueakBox has gone beyond the call of duty in his fight against "strange" people in the article Javier Solana. WP:NPA states clearly that comments must be about content not users so it's clear that Guettarda and SqueakBox have cooperated in, at least, dubious actions against other users. It's also clear Guettarda is biased in favor of SqueakBox. In this edit in my talk page, he implies that I like looking for conflict, that I'm obsessed with SqueakBox that I've to settle down and so on, all violation of WP:AGF and unpleasant remarks.

It mustn't be forgotten that according to WP:OWN, user pages belong to everybody and I don't believe a wikipedian has any right to transform his user page in a platform to attack other users. So Guettarda's supposed protection of SqueakBox's user page (really of SqueakBox's insults) is very difficult to defend in my opinion.

I'm simply asking fair treatment. I don't believe I have to see how the Wikipedia is populated with insults against me. I believe SqueakBox can contribute useful edits without transforming his user page into a gallery of attacks. So please, either unprotect the page so WP:OWN can be applied, or remove the negative comment or mark it as a personal attack untolerable in the Wikipedia or, at least, explain to me why I have to bear that kind of treatment. SqueakBox has been blocked for that unpleasant remark, What is the use of blocking him and then keeping the insult? Thank you. Hagiographer 07:58, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question from Boston Globe

I'm a reporter for Boston Globe writing a story about Wiki entries for local cities and towns. Interested to talk to contributors to articles. I saw your user name on the Newton history page. I'm on deadline, alas. Please contact me at thomascaywood@xxxxxxx.com by Sunday, Sept. 17, if you'd be willing to do a brief telephone interview about Wiki. Thanks! Thomas

Thanks Thomas -- that was a nice piece. BCorr|Брайен 00:00, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hey

What the heck was that you did on march 2 2004 to Mario Molina's page? check the history.--205.202.240.117 13:45, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi there. As I said in the edit summary, I replaced a copyright violation with a stub.
Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 00:03, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your picture of the Zakim Bridge

Hi. I recently did a bit of an overhaul on the Zakim Bunker Hill Bridge entry, including setting your picture (ZakimBridge20040307.jpg) at the top of the infobox. I was wondering where you were when you took the picture, so I (or you, or anyone else, for that matter) could give it a more descriptive caption than just the name of the bridge. It's obviously up the Chuck (heh), but I don't know if you were on a boat or another bridge (the Longfellow, maybe?). Either way, it's a great picture. Thanks. JayDuck 04:15, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2002 Gujarat violence

Could you figure out what is going on with this. It has been protected for almost 3 months now, with this fork, and I don't know whether the fork is good to go, etc. —Centrx→talk • 16:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/c/o/User_talk%7EBcorr_d88c.html"